Main Series, Appendix

N.T. Wright’s doctrinal relationship with men like E.P. Sanders, and others within the NPP movement, is a complex one.  Wright’s frequent citations of Sanders, for example, reveals this.  Some of these citations come in the form of criticisms, while most others come in the form of partial or full praise.  In the end, Wright stands within the proximity of the NPP movement as one who is advancing the movement more deeply into the realm of doctrinal eccuminism.  But these associations provide several challenges to Wright himself, and within this section I address Wright’s attempt to distinguish himself from the rest of the NPP community. 

For more information on the publication and release of Indeed, Has Paul Really Said? go here.

Main Series

Appendix: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5

Back in 2007 I completed a brief, four part series on N.T. Wright’s book entitled, What Saint Paul Really Said.  This then became the seed form for a book entitled – Indeed, has Paul Really Said? [A Critique of N.T. Wright’s Teaching on Justification].  Since the completion of this work, I have withheld it from distribution for a few reasons:

1. I wanted to give Mr. Wright an opportunity to respond to my own critique – correcting any misunderstandings that I may have conveyed in the process; and …

2. I also wanted to read some more contemporary works by Wright to see if he had altered his views in any way. 

Now, three years later, I can say that I have availed myself to both of these objectives.  Concerning the latter, I have consulted Wright’s “big commentary on Romans” in the New Interpreter’s Bible in order to see if his nuanced views of justification have been altered in any way.  Concerning the former, I emailed Wright in December of 2007 with an attached copy of the earliest transcript of my book, giving him the opportunity to critique what I had written up to that point.  In summary, I must say that his comments seemed rather odd to me, and yet they did unveil a strangely familiar form of strained logic which actually comports with what I have seen in his other writings. 

In other words, I wasn’t terribly surprised by his response. 

Having come to this point in my labors, I hope to complete my Critique of N.T. Wright’s Teaching on Justification by adding an Appendix to it, and first publishing it here (in summary form) on The Armoury.  The final form of it will be more thorough in the printed book, but most of it will be annexed here (online) as a final production of the original weblog series.  My development of the Appendix will be fairly simple: Wright’s email response to me was delivered in five points, which included an appeal from him that I consult two of his more recent works: 1. Paul, In Fresh Perspective; and 2. The New Interpreter’s Bible (Romans).  Thus, I will segment Wright’s five responses in an order that will enable me to structure an analysis of these two works of his, with the objective of answering this important question:  

Has Mr. Wright altered his views in any significant way?

[For more information on the publication and release of Indeed, Has Paul Really Said? go here].

America’s self deception is phenomenal.  Many today will mindlessly repeat the expression “Islam is a religion of peace” – an expression which gained popularity, especially during the Bush years, and thus became the defacto creed for all those who worship at the altar of P.C. (political correctness).  However, those who are willing to examine the Koran, and especially the daily news, understand that the weekly body count claimed by the followers of Allah contradicts such a mantra – no matter how many times the PCers chant it.  Fearfully, the multitudes will avoid saying that which is painfully obvious – Islam is anything but a religion of peace.  In reality, those who claim allegiance to Allah, but who refrain from “slaying the infidel” for Allah’s sake (Surah 8:7, 9:5, 47:4), would be classified as a munafiq (backslider) by Muhammad himself.  Unfortunately, the only people who are willing to tell the truth about Islam are those who have been sidelined as irrelevant “extremists.”  Case-in-point: consider the interview below conducted with Anjem Choudary – an outspoken proponent of Islam in the UK.  He correctly defines the word “Islam” and reminds his viewers what the true tenants of Islam require from the genuine followers of the cult of Muhammad.

(Note: I disdain CBN for much of what it represents, however the interview below possesses such value that I am willing to post their work.  Ultimately, such an interview as this speaks for itself, no matter who would have conducted it):

Who said that “using a 51 majority is an arrogant power grab”?

2 Corinthians 8:9: 9 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.

Michael Behe’s book – Darwin’s Black Box is a valuable work for several reasons, not the least of which is his argument of irreducible complexity (IC) – an idea that is often scoffed at by many within the “scientific” community but has never been refuted via any empirical method.  Beyond IC itself, another valuable presentation in his book is given in his chapter entitled: Publish or Perish – which reveals the financial engine that drives much of what is called science today.  In this chapter Behe reveals what many of us already know – scientific objectivity is often flushed down the toilet of personal greed, ambition, and rank pragmatism.  In order for researchers to “stay afloat” financially, they must retain research grants which support their continued studies.  As long as there is a problem to solve, whether real or perceived, then there will be a perpetual flow of dollars supplied for their research.  But what happens when a perceived problem disappears?  Well, for honest researchers, the data will be exposed, and they will just go on to the next scientific frontier.  On the other hand, for those researchers who are not so honest, they may be tempted to invent certain “fudge factors” in their research in order to perpetuate the myth of their needed research, and with it, the myth of their needed grant money. 

As one who came out of a science background, and who spent a number of years writing computer code, I find the video below (original source) to be both alarming and strangely familiar: I am not surprised by what is presented here in view of the “publish or perish” culture, but I am alarmed that so much weight has been placed on such a flimsy pursuit of scientific analysis. 

A word of caution to the potential viewer, in code form:

begin;

If video_viewed = 0 then;

goto: cabinet;

procedure: taketwodramamine AND hit_play;

else;

procedudre: do_not_watch;

end;

{yup, my awful programming strikes again}

Reid:  “Y’all jus’ stop your whining.  Jus’ do what we say and we’ll feed ya, House…ya and maybe give ya free health care.”

Taxpayers: “Nobody knows the trouble I’ve seen…”

Being popular in our modern and shallow culture isn’t necessarily a compliment.  Actually, in any generation, friendship with this world is counted as enmity with God (James 4:4).  We see the shallowness of public fame whenever people mention men like Joel Osteen.  Should you dare question the man’s teaching by one iota, his devotees will quip canonically: “…but he’s so popular!”   Similarly, Rick Warren’s popularity affords him the unspoken right to teach just about anything.  His willingness to ride on the pluralism train is accepted without a wince in the interview below.  The video clip was originally posted by hotair.com as an example of Warren’s comments against Atheism: “I don’t have enough faith to be an Atheist.”  That’s a good statement – it is loaded with much truth, by itself; however, he apparently has enough faith to be a pluralist: 

Exit question – would we expect the prophet Elijah to attend a worship ceremony populated with Baal worshippers? 

Oh, wait… he did do that (1 Kings 18).

After which time he confronted the idolaters with a verbal blast that would cause genteel ecumenists like Osteen and Warren to blush pink:

1 Kings 18:27: It came about at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, “Call out with a loud voice, for he is a god; either he is occupied or gone aside, or is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and needs to be awakened.”

Might I suggest that the NASB translators are being too polite in the above text.  When Elijah said “…either he is occupied or gone aside…” it doesn’t exactly reveal the intensity of Elijah’s mockery.  The verbs employed by Elijah rhyme quite well, and connote a symmetry of thought: siych…siyg.  Siych speaks of heavy contemplation, and siyg speaks of a person undergoing a bowel movement (The Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains).  If you take Auguste Rodin’s sculpture “The Thinker” and put him on a toilet – then you’ve approximated, in picture form, Elijah’s rebuke of their idolatry.  Clearly, Elijah was no ecumenist, nor pluralist; he was a prophet of God who was filled with a holy indignation against the idolatry of Baal.

Who knows, perhaps Warren is preparing for such a public renunciation of Allah at his next Ramadan gathering – although, I’d rather doubt it.  After renaming Jesus as “Isa” at our President’s inauguration, we are left with little grounds for a better hope.  If you think that using the Koran’s name of “Isa” for Jesus isn’t a problem, then just remember this: according to the Koran, Jesus was not the Son of God, nor was He ever crucified.  Why would we desire to render indifference to such heresy as this, any more than we might with, say…. Mormons or Jehovah Witnesses?

Below are some other posts dealing with the dangers of ecumenism and pluralism in our world today:

An Open Response to an Open Letter

The Hall of Fame vs. The Hall of Shame

The Hall of Shame @ The Armoury

Rick Warren’s Inaugural Prayer – 2009

Judas Iscariot: Rome’s First Pope

The modern mind may think of several things when remembering Thanksgiving Day, but how many would consider this to be a time of serious contemplation and even…humility?  For those who would dare to examine the beginnings of our Thanksgiving Day holiday, they would find that prayer and humiliation formulated the basis of and necessary prelude to this day of joy and celebration.  Frankly speaking, one cannot find the latter lest they seek the former. 

History reminds us of this truth, especially when we consider the writings of Mr. William Bradford who served as the governor of Plymouth Plantation almost continuously from 1621 to 1656 (except for five of years of this period).  His description of the early pilgrims, their devotion to God, and their endurance through suffering, helps us to comprehend better the significance of what we now refer to as Thanksgiving Day.  Before their own day of thanksgiving came about there was an even greater event which preceded it. In Bradford’s record below we learn of the hardships that visited Plymouth, even after new supplies and passengers arrived on the ship called the Anne:

"These passengers, when they saw their low and poor condition ashore, were much daunted and dismayed, and according to their divers humors were diversely affected. Some wished themselves in England again; others fell a-weeping, fancying their own misery in what they saw now in others; other some pitying the distress they saw their friends had been long in, and still were under. In a word, all were full of sadness. Only some of their old friends rejoiced to see them, and that it was no worse with them, for they could not expect it should be better, and now hoped they should enjoy better days together. And truly it was no marvel they should be thus affected, for they were in a very low condition; many were ragged in apparel and some little better than half naked, though some that were well stored before were well enough in this regard. But for food they were all alike, save some that had got a few peas off the ship that was last here. The best dish they could present their friends with was a lobster or a piece of fish without bread or anything else but a cup of fair spring water. And the long continuance of this diet, and their labours abroad, had something abated the freshness of their former complexion; but God gave them health and strength in a good measure, and showed them by experience the truth of that word, (Deuteronomy 8:3) ‘That man liveth not by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth a man live.’"

"When I think how sadly the Scriptures speaks of the famine in Jacob’s time, when he said to his sons, ‘God buy us food, that we may live and not die,’ (Genesis xlii.2 and xliii.1) that the famine was great or heavy in the land. And yet they had such great herds and store of cattle of sundry kinds, which, besides flesh, must needs produce other food as milk, butter and cheese, etc. And yet it was counted a sore affliction. Theirs here must needs be very great, therefore, who not only wanted the staff of bread but all these things, and had no Egypt to go to. But God fed them out of the sea for the most part, so wonderful is His providence over His in all ages; for His mercy endureth forever."

"I may not here omit how, notwithstand all their great pains and industry, and the great hopes of a large crop, the Lord seemed to blast, and take away the same, and to threaten further and more sore famine unto them. By a great drought which continued from the third week in May, till about the middle of July, without any rain and with great heat for the most part, insomuch as the corn began to wither away though it was set with fish, the moisture whereof helped it much. Yet at length it began to languish sore, and some of the drier grounds were parched like withered hay, part whereof was never recovered. Upon which they set apart a solemn day of humiliation, to seek the Lord by humble and fervent prayer, in this great distress. And He was pleased to give them a gracious and speedy answer, both to their own and the Indians’ admiration that lived amongst them. For all the morning, and greatest part of the day, it was clear weather and very hot, and not a cloud or any sign of rain to be seen; yet toward evening it began to overcast, and shortly after to rain with such sweet and gentle showers as gave them cause of rejoicing and blessing God. It came without either wind or thunder or any violence, and by degrees in that abundance was that the earth was thoroughly we and soaked and therewith. Which did so apparently revive and quicken the decayed corn and other fruits, as was wonderful to see, and made the Indians astonished to behold. And afterwards the Lord sent them such seasonable showers, with interchange of fair warm weather as, through His blessing, caused a fruitful and liberal harvest, to their no small comfort and rejoicing. For which mercy, in time convenient, they also set apart a day of thanksgiving."

[Note: "…A law of 15 Nov. 1636 (Plymouth Colony Records XI 18) allows the Governor and Assistants ‘to command solemn days of humiliation by fasting, etc., and also for thanksgiving as occasion shall be offered.’"]. Excerpt of William Bradford – Of Plymouth Plantation [1620-1647] by William Bradford, edited by Samuel Eliot Morison.

**************************************

What I love about this excerpt is that the institution of their thanksgiving celebration came some time after a day of prayer and humiliation. Here is a great lesson for us all: Genuine thankfulness can only grow and flourish in a heart that has been softened and prepared by humility (Philippians 2:1-14; 1 Cor 4:7). In view of the truth of God’s word, and in view of the historic example of these godly brethren, let us all seek the Lord prayerfully, with humility, and with thanksgiving!

Soli Deo Gloria

(Repost from The Armoury, November 2005)